While some of the historical aspects raised by Magill did make for some interesting reading, the whole book - except for the 11 page epilogue - really read like a research paper, filled with third party quotes. It isn't until the epilogue where we finally get to read Magill's opinion. The only quote I found worthy of mentioning here is the following broad declaration of insincerity:

"Insincerity pretends toward a democratic sympathy while engaging in aristocratic deceit."

Basically the 500 year recap of sincerity is that sincerity has oscillated along a linear spectrum. Some decades/centuries saw an embrace of sincerity as the norm. Other decades/centuries saw sincerity as a way to rebel against societal norms (the hipster chic of the 1980's-1990's). These oscillations include eras where insincerity/being radically superficial was the norm, such as late seventeenth-century France and America in the 1950's to the over indulgence in what some individuals view as sincerity with over exposure to Oprah, Dr. Phil, Jerry Springer, Howard Stern, Facebook, YouTube and Twitter. As Magill correctly points out, society would never survive in an environment that exists at either end of the sincerity/insincerity spectrum:

"A world without any sincerity would embody the X-Files motto, Trust no one. Now imagine the exact opposite, a world where everyone was sincere all the time. Everyone would always say exactly what they were thinking or feeling, regardless of its unwantedness, inappropriateness, inaccuracy, relation to truth, poor entertainment value or consequences..."

For society to function on a level that does not provide for a miserable existence, we need to allow sincerity and insincerity to coexist. Sincerity, as an individual act, is something that is subject to personal to the personal evaluation of the individual. Yes, there will always be individuals who are more or less sincere then we may like, and that is when society, as a collective, should be able to maintain the middle path to the benefit of all.

Overall, an okay research-laden read but if you are strapped for time, you can pretty much just jump to the end and read the 11-page epilogue and forego wading through 221-pages of 500 years of history. At the half way mark while reading this one I couldn't help but think that the rather long title is an apt one, especially the last bit about we ALL have something to say (no matter how dull). ( )

Interesting and provocative with some nice touches of snarky humor. More erudite than I expected. ( )